Efficacy of B-cell-targeted therapy with rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: An open-label study indicated that selective depletion of B cells with the use of rituximab led to sustained clinical improvements for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. To confirm these observations, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. METHODS: We randomly assigned 161 patients who had active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate to receive one of four treatments: oral methotrexate (> or =10 mg per week) (control); rituximab (1000 mg on days 1 and 15); rituximab plus cyclophosphamide (750 mg on days 3 and 17); or rituximab plus methotrexate. Responses defined according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) were assessed at week 24 (primary analyses) and week 48 (exploratory analyses). RESULTS: At week 24, the proportion of patients with 50 percent improvement in disease symptoms according to the ACR criteria, the primary end point, was significantly greater with the rituximab-methotrexate combination (43 percent, P=0.005) and the rituximab-cyclophosphamide combination (41 percent, P=0.005) than with methotrexate alone (13 percent). In all groups treated with rituximab, a significantly higher proportion of patients had a 20 percent improvement in disease symptoms according to the ACR criteria (65 to 76 percent vs. 38 percent, P< or =0.025) or had EULAR responses (83 to 85 percent vs. 50 percent, P< or =0.004). All ACR responses were maintained at week 48 in the rituximab-methotrexate group. The majority of adverse events occurred with the first rituximab infusion: at 24 weeks, serious infections occurred in one patient (2.5 percent) in the control group and in four patients (3.3 percent) in the rituximab groups. Peripheral-blood immunoglobulin concentrations remained within normal ranges. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate treatment, a single course of two infusions of rituximab, alone or in combination with either cyclophosphamide or continued methotrexate, provided significant improvement in disease symptoms at both weeks 24 and 48

Infliximab plus methotrexate is superior to methotrexate alone in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis in methotrexate-naive patients: the RESPOND study

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of treatment with infliximab plus methotrexate with methotrexate alone in methotrexate-naive patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods: In this open-label study, patients 18 years and older with active PsA who were naive to methotrexate and not receiving disease-modifying therapy (N=115) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either infliximab (5 mg/kg) at weeks 0, 2, 6 and 14 plus methotrexate (15 mg/week); or methotrexate (15 mg/week) alone. The primary assessment was American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 16. Secondary outcome measures included psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) and dactylitis and enthesitis assessments. Results: At week 16, 86.3% of patients receiving infliximab plus methotrexate and 66.7% of those receiving methotrexate alone achieved an ACR20 response (p<0.02). Of patients whose baseline PASI was 2.5 or greater, 97.1% receiving infliximab plus methotrexate compared with 54.3% receiving methotrexate alone experienced a 75% or greater improvement in PASI (p<0.0001). Improvements in C-reactive protein levels, DAS28 response and remission rates, dactylitis, fatigue and morning stiffness duration were also significantly greater in the group receiving infliximab. In the infliximab plus methotrexate group, 46% (26/57) had treatment-related adverse events (AE) and two patients had serious AE, compared with 24% with AE (13/54) and no serious AE in the methotrexate-alone group. Conclusions: Treatment with infliximab plus methotrexate in methotrexate-naive patients with active PsA demonstrated significantly greater ACR20 response rates and PASI75 improvement compared with methotrexate alone and was generally well tolerated. This trial is registered in the US National Institutes of Health clinicaltrials.gov database, identifier NCT00367237

Digital ulcers predict a worse disease course in patients with systemic sclerosis

Objective: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a systemic autoimmune disease with high morbidity and significant mortality. There is a great need of predictors that would allow risk stratification of patients with SSc and ultimately initiation of treatment early enough to ensure optimal clinical results. In this study, we evaluated whether a history of digital ulcers (HDU) at presentation may be a predictor of vascular outcomes and of overall clinical worsening and death in patients with SSc. Methods: Patients from the EULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) database, satisfying at inclusion the 1980 American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for SSc, who had a follow-up of at least 3 years since baseline or who have died, were included in the analysis. HDU at presentation as a predictor of disease worsening or death was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results :3196 patients matched the inclusion criteria (male sex 13.2%, 33.4% diffuse subset). At presentation, 1092/3196 patients had an HDU (34.1%). In multivariable analysis adjusting for age, gender and all parameters considered potentially significant, HDU was predictive for the presence of active digital ulcers (DUs) at prospective visits (HR (95% CI)): 2.41(1.91 to 3.03), p&lt;0.001, for an elevated systolic pulmonary arterial pressure on heart ultrasound (US-PAPs):1.36 (1.03 to 1.80), p=0.032, for any cardiovascular event (new DUs, elevated US-PAPs or LV failure):3.56 (2.26 to 5.62), p&lt;0.001, and for death (1.53 (1.16 to 2.02), p=0.003). Conclusions :In patients with SSc, HDU at presentation predicts the occurrence of DUs at follow-up and is associated with cardiovascular worsening and decreased survival

Double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial of the interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab, in European patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an incomplete response to methotrexate.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the safety and efficacy of repeat infusions of tocilizumab (previously known as MRA), a humanized anti-interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor antibody, alone and in combination with methotrexate (MTX), for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The study group comprised 359 patients with active RA in whom the response to MTX was inadequate. During a stabilization period, these patients received their current dose of MTX for at least 4 weeks. Following stabilization, they were randomized to 1 of 7 treatment arms, as follows: tocilizumab at doses of 2 mg/kg, 4 mg/kg, or 8 mg/kg either as monotherapy or in combination with MTX, or MTX plus placebo. RESULTS: A 20% response (improvement) according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20 response) was achieved by 61% and 63% of patients receiving 4 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab as monotherapy, respectively, and by 63% and 74% of patients receiving those doses of tocilizumab plus MTX, respectively, compared with 41% of patients receiving placebo plus MTX. Statistically significant ACR50 and ACR70 responses were observed in patients receiving combination therapy with either 4 mg/kg or 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab plus MTX (P &lt; 0.05). A dose-related reduction in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints was observed from week 4 onward, in all patients except those receiving monotherapy with 2 mg/kg of tocilizumab. In the majority of patients who received 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab, the C-reactive protein level/erythrocyte sedimentation rate normalized, while placebo plus MTX had little effect on these laboratory parameters. Tocilizumab was mostly well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of other biologic and immunosuppressive therapies. Alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels followed a sawtooth pattern (rising and falling between infusions). There were moderate but reversible increases in the nonfasting total cholesterol and triglyceride levels and reversible reductions in the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and neutrophil levels. There were 2 cases of sepsis, both of which occurred in patients who were receiving combination therapy with 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab plus MTX. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that targeted blockade of IL-6 signaling is a highly efficacious and promising means of decreasing disease activity in RA

A randomised, placebo controlled, comparative trial of the gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of AZD3582 versus naproxen in osteoarthritis

Objective: To evaluate the gastrointestinal safety and efficacy of the COX inhibiting nitric oxide donator AZD3582 in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Methods: 970 patients were randomised (7:7:2) to AZD3582 750 mg twice daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily, or placebo twice daily in a double blind study. The primary end point was the six week incidence of endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcers (diameter ⩾3 mm). Overall damage measured on the Lanza scale was a secondary end point. Safety and tolerability assessments included endoscopic upper gastrointestinal erosions and the gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS). Efficacy was primarily assessed by WOMAC. Results: The incidence of ulcers with AZD3582 was 9.7% and with naproxen 13.7% (p = 0.07, NS), v 0% on placebo. The incidence of Lanza scores >2 was higher with naproxen (43.7%) than with AZD3582 (32.2%) (p<0.001). Compared with baseline, significantly fewer ulcers and erosions developed in stomach and stomach/duodenum combined, and fewer erosions developed in stomach, duodenum, and both combined on AZD3582 than on naproxen. GSRS reflux and abdominal pain subscale scores were lower for AZD3582 than for naproxen but there was no difference for indigestion, constipation, and diarrhoea. AZD3582 was as effective as naproxen at improving WOMAC scores. Both agents were well tolerated, with no significant effects on blood pressure. Conclusions: At doses with similar efficacy in relieving osteoarthritis symptoms, the primary end point of six week endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcer incidence was not significantly different between AZD3582 and naproxen. Most secondary endoscopic gastrointestinal end points favoured AZD3582